You do know that TRIBBLE stands for something rather derogatory yeah, so using it to describe Star Trek: Discovery (DSC) is not clever or funny, it is immature at best and insulting at worst.
Yes, in Star Trek, TRIBBLE stands for Star Trek Discovery, nothing more and nothing less. Do not let the haters define what the acronym means. If you do that, then you've already lost the argument.
STILES: Give it to Spock.
KIRK: I didn't quite get that, Mister Stiles.
STILES: Nothing, sir.
KIRK: Repeat it.
STILES: I was suggesting that Mister Spock could probably translate it for you, sir.
KIRK: I assume you're complimenting Mister Spock on his ability to decode.
STILES: I'm not sure, sir.
KIRK: Well, here's one thing you can be sure of, Mister. Leave any bigotry in your quarters. There's no room for it on the Bridge. Do I make myself clear?
STILES: You do, sir.
I wanted to comment on this specifically because I remember being very confused when it aired as it seemed so out of place with the rest of the first season shows. Especially when Sulu follows it up with the comment about spies being aboard. Spies? What? How did Sulu leap to that? Just because Romulans look like Vulcans?
And the leap to, holy TRIBBLE- there are Romulan Spies and they stole our ship design and we may have Romulans aboard who are undercover as Vulcans suddenly makes more sense.
When that element was changed, not all the dialog was change and I guess the makers thought the fact that Romulans looked like Vulcans was enough so that they could keep that story conflict. Dropping it completely would have gutted the script.
As a side note, they then went and lost the Romulan ship model somehow, and thus had to use D7s when they next appeared in "Enterprise Incident" forcing a Klingon/Romulan arms deal into the storyline. Of such things is canon made.
> @jonsills said: > Talon, please learn to use the quote function. Your multiple > symbols are giving me a headache. > > If CBS had not enforced their trademark on Star Trek, it would have been weakened severely. We had prolonged discussions about this back when the whole thing went down, but it can be boiled down to this: "Aspirin" was once a trademarked name for acetasalicylic acid tablets manufactured by Bayer. Bayer failed to defend their copyright when other companies packaged their own "Aspirin" tablets, and now the term is generic. (That's why when you purchase kleenex from any company besides Kimberly-Clark, it's labeled "facial tissue" and not "Kleenex", because Kimberly-Clark has a team of attorneys standing by to come down like a ton of tissue paper on anyone violating their trademark.) > > Also, while the superior acting of the people dragooned into making Prelude To Axanar masked it, the story itself was thin gruel indeed. All you've got is "an impending war". We've seen that before, and done better; making clunky-looking ships with the TOS aesthetic didn't make it a superior product. Nor did invoking Garth of Izar, whose backstory doesn't really need to be explored - he was Kirk's hero when Kirk was at the Academy, then he went nuts, tried to destroy a planet, was confined by his crew, and went to an asylum. That's all we need about him, quite frankly.
I'm posting from a phone. It does it this way. I'd love to do it from home, but ya know....thing called work. When I get a bit of free time I check forums and such. Sorry. Can't help the website devs do it this way.
And yes Axanar had some things that were flawed I will give you that. However. Not as flawed as DISC(since people are losing their minds that I use TRIBBLE, and if people can't get I'm digging at Disc, well). Because the list is long and distinguished on the flaws.
However some changes in the era, say the 2390s or beyond, most of the tech issues I have with the show die instantly. Then it's just story writing issues I have a problem with.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
You do know that TRIBBLE stands for something rather derogatory yeah, so using it to describe Star Trek: Discovery (DSC) is not clever or funny, it is immature at best and insulting at worst.
Yes, in Star Trek, TRIBBLE stands for Star Trek Discovery, nothing more and nothing less. Do not let the haters define what the acronym means. If you do that, then you've already lost the argument.
erm no it really doesn't,
TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, DSC
TMP, TWOK, TSFS, TVH, TFF, UDC, GEN, FC, INS, NEM
none of these have ST in front of them...
Umm Offical vs Fan...
we love to abbreviate names... 3 letters is perfect.
Voyager is VOY cause STV is the movie ST 5
ENT never liked it cause in canon lore before that show... it never existed. I basically skipped the entire show, never watched a full episode. STE or ENT to me was a /shrug
TOS... WTF. to me it is always ST. With Picard & crew as NG or TNG.
to me Discovery is TRIBBLE /shrug I dont hate the show, cause I have never seen it. I dont see it as bad... they could of called the show something else but they choose Discovery... don't even know why... the ship they are on is not called Discovery right?
You do know that TRIBBLE stands for something rather derogatory yeah, so using it to describe Star Trek: Discovery (DSC) is not clever or funny, it is immature at best and insulting at worst.
Yes, in Star Trek, TRIBBLE stands for Star Trek Discovery, nothing more and nothing less. Do not let the haters define what the acronym means. If you do that, then you've already lost the argument.
erm no it really doesn't,
TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, DSC
TMP, TWOK, TSFS, TVH, TFF, UDC, GEN, FC, INS, NEM
none of these have ST in front of them...
Umm Offical vs Fan...
we love to abbreviate names... 3 letters is perfect.
Voyager is VOY cause STV is the movie ST 5
ENT never liked it cause in canon lore before that show... it never existed. I basically skipped the entire show, never watched a full episode. STE or ENT to me was a /shrug
TOS... WTF. to me it is always ST. With Picard & crew as NG or TNG.
to me Discovery is TRIBBLE /shrug I dont hate the show, cause I have never seen it. I dont see it as bad... they could of called the show something else but they choose Discovery... don't even know why... the ship they are on is not called Discovery right?
The ship is called Discovery, but we don't get to it until episode 3.
Yes, in Star Trek, TRIBBLE stands for Star Trek Discovery, nothing more and nothing less. Do not let the haters define what the acronym means. If you do that, then you've already lost the argument.
Additionally, Brian Fuller originally abbreviated it "TRIBBLE". I prefer to think of myself as a traditionalist. Godspeed Brian, you crazy b@astard.
We do not know as of yet, it depends on how invasive the content will be.
Hopefully it will just be for the TRIBBLE fans and not be unavoidable content.
Agreed. I don't like unavoidable content. Nor do I like having to click on a shedload of "Skip" buttons to get to where I want to be (i.e. New Romulus after they locked it into the episode progression).
SJWs took over that production destroying everything in an attempt to make a political statement.
It's an ugly representation of what happens, when politics defines creativity. It's restricted then to ugly statements about modern times... They thought that by making it part of today's political climate...
I don't know if you realize it or not, but Star Trek has been about making statements about contemporary politics since its inception. TOS and TNG were especially riddled with social and political commentary; DS9, VOY, and ENT had more than a few episodes to that effect as well. DSC did nothing out of the ordinary in trying to make political statements about the modern political climate. You can certainly argue it did it poorly - I wouldn't entirely disagree, either - but you can't say DSC was wrong for doing what Trek has always done.
Agreed. Classic Trek knew how to do decent social commentary (if a bit too over the top and impossibly utopian on occasion). Modern Trek, on the other hand, is more hamfisted in that regard.
SJWs took over that production destroying everything in an attempt to make a political statement.
It's an ugly representation of what happens, when politics defines creativity. It's restricted then to ugly statements about modern times... They thought that by making it part of today's political climate...
I don't know if you realize it or not, but Star Trek has been about making statements about contemporary politics since its inception. TOS and TNG were especially riddled with social and political commentary; DS9, VOY, and ENT had more than a few episodes to that effect as well. DSC did nothing out of the ordinary in trying to make political statements about the modern political climate. You can certainly argue it did it poorly - I wouldn't entirely disagree, either - but you can't say DSC was wrong for doing what Trek has always done.
Agreed. Classic Trek knew how to do decent social commentary (if a bit too over the top and impossibly utopian on occasion). Modern Trek, on the other hand, is more hamfisted in that regard.
Ahem. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" anyone? It's about as subtle about its anti-racism message as an anvil to the face. Ditto any other time Kirk started lecturing the alien of the week.
And there's often a good reason for that. True story: the mayor of San Francisco (IIRC) actually proposed something very much like the Sanctuary Districts in "Past Tense"while the episode was being filmed.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
SJWs took over that production destroying everything in an attempt to make a political statement.
It's an ugly representation of what happens, when politics defines creativity. It's restricted then to ugly statements about modern times... They thought that by making it part of today's political climate...
I don't know if you realize it or not, but Star Trek has been about making statements about contemporary politics since its inception. TOS and TNG were especially riddled with social and political commentary; DS9, VOY, and ENT had more than a few episodes to that effect as well. DSC did nothing out of the ordinary in trying to make political statements about the modern political climate. You can certainly argue it did it poorly - I wouldn't entirely disagree, either - but you can't say DSC was wrong for doing what Trek has always done.
Agreed. Classic Trek knew how to do decent social commentary (if a bit too over the top and impossibly utopian on occasion). Modern Trek, on the other hand, is more hamfisted in that regard.
Ahem. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" anyone? It's about as subtle about its anti-racism message as an anvil to the face. Ditto any other time Kirk started lecturing the alien of the week.
And there's often a good reason for that. True story: the mayor of San Francisco actually proposed something very much like the Sanctuary Districts in "Past Tense"while the episode was being filmed.
I didn't say it was necessarily perfect. But it was scores better than the first season of TNG and more modern offerings (the reboot films and TRIBBLE). And I like my social commentary to both entertain and be relevant.
SJWs took over that production destroying everything in an attempt to make a political statement.
It's an ugly representation of what happens, when politics defines creativity. It's restricted then to ugly statements about modern times... They thought that by making it part of today's political climate...
I don't know if you realize it or not, but Star Trek has been about making statements about contemporary politics since its inception. TOS and TNG were especially riddled with social and political commentary; DS9, VOY, and ENT had more than a few episodes to that effect as well. DSC did nothing out of the ordinary in trying to make political statements about the modern political climate. You can certainly argue it did it poorly - I wouldn't entirely disagree, either - but you can't say DSC was wrong for doing what Trek has always done.
Agreed. Classic Trek knew how to do decent social commentary (if a bit too over the top and impossibly utopian on occasion). Modern Trek, on the other hand, is more hamfisted in that regard.
Ahem. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" anyone? It's about as subtle about its anti-racism message as an anvil to the face. Ditto any other time Kirk started lecturing the alien of the week.
And there's often a good reason for that. True story: the mayor of San Francisco actually proposed something very much like the Sanctuary Districts in "Past Tense"while the episode was being filmed.
I didn't say it was necessarily perfect. But it was scores better than the first season of TNG and more modern offerings (the reboot films and TRIBBLE). And I like my social commentary to both entertain and be relevant.
Now i wonder if you see it as less anvilicious because you just don't get it... IE half the social commentary doesn't mean anything to you so you ignore it as fluff.
well, afterfinally went ahead a used a free trial to warch it, I gonna say, my first thought was right we got most the bits that are worth any attention already.
I can't even say we may get some nice kdf things cause quite frankly I didn't see anything that looked like a klingon anything. I guess nice terran stuff is a plus if nothing else my main could add the emperor's sword to his ever growing collection of trophy swords. after we kill who ever it is currently and let leeta take over.
I get why cryptic is gonna focus on it I'm not happy about it, but I get it.
if I stop posting it doesn't make you right it. just means I don't have enough rum to continue interacting with you.
The main reason you think TOS wasn't making some fairly radical political statements in the 1960ies is because you don't really know (or if you are around my age or older)
I lived during that time, saw the show as it first aired, and I remember them quite well and the state of the nation quite well thank you.
Not that well, apparently. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" was certainly the most blatant, but you should really both rewatch "The Cloud Minders" and check out what David Gerrold had in mind for it before it was largely neutered by the network. Or perhaps you missed the anti-war message of "A Taste of Armageddon", or the not-exactly-subtle lecture against prejudice and bigotry in "Balance of Terror", or the lesson about those who feel innately superior in "Space Seed", or, well, the entirety of "Patterns of Force"...
> @markhawkman said: > oldravenman3025 wrote: » > > starswordc wrote: » > > oldravenman3025 wrote: » > > jexsamx wrote: » > > the1tigglet wrote: » > > SJWs took over that production destroying everything in an attempt to make a political statement. > > It's an ugly representation of what happens, when politics defines creativity. It's restricted then to ugly statements about modern times... They thought that by making it part of today's political climate... > > > > I don't know if you realize it or not, but Star Trek has been about making statements about contemporary politics since its inception. TOS and TNG were especially riddled with social and political commentary; DS9, VOY, and ENT had more than a few episodes to that effect as well. DSC did nothing out of the ordinary in trying to make political statements about the modern political climate. You can certainly argue it did it poorly - I wouldn't entirely disagree, either - but you can't say DSC was wrong for doing what Trek has always done. > > > > Agreed. Classic Trek knew how to do decent social commentary (if a bit too over the top and impossibly utopian on occasion). Modern Trek, on the other hand, is more hamfisted in that regard. > > > > Ahem. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" anyone? It's about as subtle about its anti-racism message as an anvil to the face. Ditto any other time Kirk started lecturing the alien of the week. > > And there's often a good reason for that. True story: the mayor of San Francisco actually proposed something very much like the Sanctuary Districts in "Past Tense" while the episode was being filmed. > > > > I didn't say it was necessarily perfect. But it was scores better than the first season of TNG and more modern offerings (the reboot films and TRIBBLE). And I like my social commentary to both entertain and be relevant. > > > > Now i wonder if you see it as less anvilicious because you just don't get it... IE half the social commentary doesn't mean anything to you so you ignore it as fluff. kabutotokugawa wrote: » > > Are you kidding? Have you not seen what many Trekkies all over the net (from Youtube, to IMBD, to TrekBBS, etc.) have been saying about TRIBBLE? > > > > This seems to mirror what I've been seeing:
You just hit the nail on the head.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
> @the1tigglet said:
> Let me just add, that if they were interested in coming out with relevant new content, why not make Axanar content be the next content patch?!
Because Axanar is not canon.
Also did you forget the lawsuit to stop that man.
Oh and next you'll be asking for unicorns
Oh hey look, it's the canon police! Nee-naw-nee-naw-nee-naw.
> @the1tigglet said:
> Let me just add, that if they were interested in coming out with relevant new content, why not make Axanar content be the next content patch?!
Because Axanar is not canon.
Also did you forget the lawsuit to stop that man.
Oh and next you'll be asking for unicorns
Oh hey look, it's the canon police! Nee-naw-nee-naw-nee-naw.
Not that well, apparently. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" was certainly the most blatant, but you should really both rewatch and check out what David Gerrold had in mind for it before it was largely neutered by the network. "The Cloud Minders"
3rd season, I did leave that one out because I don't consider being anti-slavery that much of a statement in 1969. Slavery was ended in 1865 and The Civil Rights Acts was 5 years old by that time. It would be on par with a show saying murder is bad, like Wolf in the Fold. Something worth saying now and then.
I don't care about David Gerrold's plans any more than I care about Ellison's plans for "City on the Edge of Forever". I'm just glad that neither came to pass.
Or perhaps you missed the anti-war message of "A Taste of Armageddon"
That wasn't anti-war, it was anti-*clean* war, i.e. a fake war that killed people but left the culture and infrastructure intact allowing it to go on forever. Kirk and crew were more than welling not just to rage *real* war to stop it, but to destroy their entire planet while doing so.
The meaning was simple- if you go to war, destroy your enemy completely and rapidly- don't just target part of them. In plain historical terms, WWII, not Vietnam although one would have to remember that all the lessons of the latter wouldn't be clear for half a decade yet.
or the lesson about those who feel innately superior in "Space Seed", or, well, the entirety of "Patterns of Force"...
That was a lesson about Eugenics and once again "power corrupting". Not just feeling superior, although I don't mind that message as such, it's TNG should have heared.
It's one worth hearing again, as western culture is once again considering a type of eugenics.
The main reason you think TOS wasn't making some fairly radical political statements in the 1960ies is because you don't really know (or if you are around my age or older)
I lived during that time, saw the show as it first aired, and I remember them quite well and the state of the nation quite well thank you.
Not that well, apparently. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" was certainly the most blatant, but you should really both rewatch "The Cloud Minders" and check out what David Gerrold had in mind for it before it was largely neutered by the network. Or perhaps you missed the anti-war message of "A Taste of Armageddon", or the not-exactly-subtle lecture against prejudice and bigotry in "Balance of Terror", or the lesson about those who feel innately superior in "Space Seed", or, well, the entirety of "Patterns of Force"...
Hell, the mere act of putting a female (!) black (!!) commissioned naval officer (!!!) on the bridge (!!!!) was a radical left-wing act back then, despite the fact that (as George Takei later put it) she mostly just "answered the phones." And there were TV stations throughout the South that refused to air the episode where aliens make Uhura and Kirk kiss (this after Nichols and Shatner deliberately flubbed every take that tried to hide it).
And if Roddenberry had had his way, they would've had a female first officer who was every bit a badass as her CO (the network killed that one).
(In comparison, off forum I'm friends with a self-described Marxist who considers DSC regressive in comparison to earlier Star Trek shows, with some reason.)
Not that well, apparently. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" was certainly the most blatant, but you should really both rewatch and check out what David Gerrold had in mind for it before it was largely neutered by the network. "The Cloud Minders"
3rd season, I did leave that one out because I don't consider being anti-slavery that much of a statement in 1969. Slavery was ended in 1865 and The Civil Rights Acts was 5 years old by that time. It would be on par with a show saying murder is bad, like Wolf in the Fold. Something worth saying now and then.
You need to study Southern history better. Seriously. (And for the record, I've lived in North Carolina since I was 11.)
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
This discussion, how people arbitrarily embrace the shows they like, disregard the ones they don’t, and present completely subjective arguments as empirical fact and evidence that their personal tastes should dictate Trek canon, well, I imagine the same process created every major religion on this planet.
(In comparison, off forum I'm friends with a self-described Marxist who considers DSC regressive in comparison to earlier Star Trek shows, with some reason.)
That article actually does pretty good job of detailing most of my own issues with Discovery.
Thinking about it now, I actually shouldn't worry as much, since I don't really think Cryptic's writers are capable of the same level of "grimdark" as Discovery's showrunners. They kind of tried during the Iconian war, but it's a little hard to capture that same feeling in a video game; especially an MMO. More than likely, we'll be getting more of the same dorky space adventures (with lots of shooting) that we normally get, with a matching, Saturday morning cartoon-level antagonist. Standard Cryptic fare.
Again, I just want to eventually see the story move past the recent ending of the Hurq arc. I was kind of hoping we'd eventually make it to Andromeda, since we've already kind of explored most of the more interesting parts of our own galaxy.
"There will never be enough blood to wash away my need for vengeance! A single world...I could destroy a million worlds and it would not be enough! Your existence is an insult to the memory of my people! I will continue my fight, even if I must fight alone!"
THIS^
To hell with new content, how about they fix what is not working instead. That would certainly be more welcome at this point.
Agreed. They gorge out new content faster than some people can keep up with, and is always accompanied by a legion of new bugs and imbalances, of which only one third gets fixed (if we're lucky).
Or perhaps you missed the anti-war message of "A Taste of Armageddon"
That wasn't anti-war, it was anti-*clean* war, i.e. a fake war that killed people but left the culture and infrastructure intact allowing it to go on forever. Kirk and crew were more than welling not just to rage *real* war to stop it, but to destroy their entire planet while doing so.
The meaning was simple- if you go to war, destroy your enemy completely and rapidly- don't just target part of them. In plain historical terms, WWII, not Vietnam although one would have to remember that all the lessons of the latter wouldn't be clear for half a decade yet.
That's the sort of thing that makes for an ineffective social commentary. Assuming your read is correct that is. I saw it more as an examination of what it means to be "civilized". Shat actually had a pretty good monolog about that. the aliens of the week believed their way of life to be "civilized" because they had eliminated violence from war.... the problem was that their wars still killed millions of people.
(In comparison, off forum I'm friends with a self-described Marxist who considers DSC regressive in comparison to earlier Star Trek shows, with some reason.)
That article actually does pretty good job of detailing most of my own issues with Discovery.
The article was very TNG focused and basically ignored all the other shows (especially DS9 and Enterprise). Each show has been in different in very significant ways from the others with only a thin overlay to give the illusion they exist in the same time line. Even a passing examination would reveal that couldn't possibility be the case as the inconsistencies are just too great in number and seriousness.
I'm not paying to watch TRIBBLE, so I can't comment on its story beyond what I've seen in Youtube videos and various articles I've read. It looks very bad to my eye, but not for the reasons given in that article. Still, with what little I do know it's not the bottom of the heap for me. That honor belongs to TNG. If I ever do watch it for free, I may change my mind.
Comments
erm no it really doesn't,
TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, DSC
TMP, TWOK, TSFS, TVH, TFF, UDC, GEN, FC, INS, NEM
none of these have ST in front of them...
I wanted to comment on this specifically because I remember being very confused when it aired as it seemed so out of place with the rest of the first season shows. Especially when Sulu follows it up with the comment about spies being aboard. Spies? What? How did Sulu leap to that? Just because Romulans look like Vulcans?
Turns out that script changes were behind it. One of the original drafts had the Romulan ship looking like a copy of the Enterprise. This draft was used by Jame Blish in his first novelization of the show: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_(Bantam_Books)#Episode_novelizations_(1976–78). Some of that draft's dialog appears there.
So we have in rapid fire:
And the leap to, holy TRIBBLE- there are Romulan Spies and they stole our ship design and we may have Romulans aboard who are undercover as Vulcans suddenly makes more sense.
When that element was changed, not all the dialog was change and I guess the makers thought the fact that Romulans looked like Vulcans was enough so that they could keep that story conflict. Dropping it completely would have gutted the script.
As a side note, they then went and lost the Romulan ship model somehow, and thus had to use D7s when they next appeared in "Enterprise Incident" forcing a Klingon/Romulan arms deal into the storyline. Of such things is canon made.
> Talon, please learn to use the quote function. Your multiple > symbols are giving me a headache.
>
> If CBS had not enforced their trademark on Star Trek, it would have been weakened severely. We had prolonged discussions about this back when the whole thing went down, but it can be boiled down to this: "Aspirin" was once a trademarked name for acetasalicylic acid tablets manufactured by Bayer. Bayer failed to defend their copyright when other companies packaged their own "Aspirin" tablets, and now the term is generic. (That's why when you purchase kleenex from any company besides Kimberly-Clark, it's labeled "facial tissue" and not "Kleenex", because Kimberly-Clark has a team of attorneys standing by to come down like a ton of tissue paper on anyone violating their trademark.)
>
> Also, while the superior acting of the people dragooned into making Prelude To Axanar masked it, the story itself was thin gruel indeed. All you've got is "an impending war". We've seen that before, and done better; making clunky-looking ships with the TOS aesthetic didn't make it a superior product. Nor did invoking Garth of Izar, whose backstory doesn't really need to be explored - he was Kirk's hero when Kirk was at the Academy, then he went nuts, tried to destroy a planet, was confined by his crew, and went to an asylum. That's all we need about him, quite frankly.
I'm posting from a phone. It does it this way. I'd love to do it from home, but ya know....thing called work. When I get a bit of free time I check forums and such. Sorry. Can't help the website devs do it this way.
And yes Axanar had some things that were flawed I will give you that. However. Not as flawed as DISC(since people are losing their minds that I use TRIBBLE, and if people can't get I'm digging at Disc, well). Because the list is long and distinguished on the flaws.
However some changes in the era, say the 2390s or beyond, most of the tech issues I have with the show die instantly. Then it's just story writing issues I have a problem with.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
Umm Offical vs Fan...
we love to abbreviate names... 3 letters is perfect.
Voyager is VOY cause STV is the movie ST 5
ENT never liked it cause in canon lore before that show... it never existed. I basically skipped the entire show, never watched a full episode. STE or ENT to me was a /shrug
TOS... WTF. to me it is always ST. With Picard & crew as NG or TNG.
to me Discovery is TRIBBLE /shrug I dont hate the show, cause I have never seen it. I dont see it as bad... they could of called the show something else but they choose Discovery... don't even know why... the ship they are on is not called Discovery right?
The ship is called Discovery, but we don't get to it until episode 3.
Agreed. I don't like unavoidable content. Nor do I like having to click on a shedload of "Skip" buttons to get to where I want to be (i.e. New Romulus after they locked it into the episode progression).
Agreed. Classic Trek knew how to do decent social commentary (if a bit too over the top and impossibly utopian on occasion). Modern Trek, on the other hand, is more hamfisted in that regard.
Ahem. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" anyone? It's about as subtle about its anti-racism message as an anvil to the face. Ditto any other time Kirk started lecturing the alien of the week.
And there's often a good reason for that. True story: the mayor of San Francisco (IIRC) actually proposed something very much like the Sanctuary Districts in "Past Tense" while the episode was being filmed.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
I didn't say it was necessarily perfect. But it was scores better than the first season of TNG and more modern offerings (the reboot films and TRIBBLE). And I like my social commentary to both entertain and be relevant.
My character Tsin'xing
I can't even say we may get some nice kdf things cause quite frankly I didn't see anything that looked like a klingon anything. I guess nice terran stuff is a plus if nothing else my main could add the emperor's sword to his ever growing collection of trophy swords. after we kill who ever it is currently and let leeta take over.
I get why cryptic is gonna focus on it I'm not happy about it, but I get it.
if I stop posting it doesn't make you right it. just means I don't have enough rum to continue interacting with you.
> oldravenman3025 wrote: »
>
> starswordc wrote: »
>
> oldravenman3025 wrote: »
>
> jexsamx wrote: »
>
> the1tigglet wrote: »
>
> SJWs took over that production destroying everything in an attempt to make a political statement.
>
> It's an ugly representation of what happens, when politics defines creativity. It's restricted then to ugly statements about modern times... They thought that by making it part of today's political climate...
>
>
>
> I don't know if you realize it or not, but Star Trek has been about making statements about contemporary politics since its inception. TOS and TNG were especially riddled with social and political commentary; DS9, VOY, and ENT had more than a few episodes to that effect as well. DSC did nothing out of the ordinary in trying to make political statements about the modern political climate. You can certainly argue it did it poorly - I wouldn't entirely disagree, either - but you can't say DSC was wrong for doing what Trek has always done.
>
>
>
> Agreed. Classic Trek knew how to do decent social commentary (if a bit too over the top and impossibly utopian on occasion). Modern Trek, on the other hand, is more hamfisted in that regard.
>
>
>
> Ahem. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" anyone? It's about as subtle about its anti-racism message as an anvil to the face. Ditto any other time Kirk started lecturing the alien of the week.
>
> And there's often a good reason for that. True story: the mayor of San Francisco actually proposed something very much like the Sanctuary Districts in "Past Tense" while the episode was being filmed.
>
>
>
> I didn't say it was necessarily perfect. But it was scores better than the first season of TNG and more modern offerings (the reboot films and TRIBBLE). And I like my social commentary to both entertain and be relevant.
>
>
>
> Now i wonder if you see it as less anvilicious because you just don't get it... IE half the social commentary doesn't mean anything to you so you ignore it as fluff. kabutotokugawa wrote: »
>
> Are you kidding? Have you not seen what many Trekkies all over the net (from Youtube, to IMBD, to TrekBBS, etc.) have been saying about TRIBBLE?
>
>
>
> This seems to mirror what I've been seeing:
You just hit the nail on the head.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
Bug fixes would be nice...
Oh hey look, it's the canon police! Nee-naw-nee-naw-nee-naw.
I've been resisting arrest since 2011 - cheers.
The more I read through this thread, the more I feel we need this. I wish it was happening today.
3rd season, I did leave that one out because I don't consider being anti-slavery that much of a statement in 1969. Slavery was ended in 1865 and The Civil Rights Acts was 5 years old by that time. It would be on par with a show saying murder is bad, like Wolf in the Fold. Something worth saying now and then.
I don't care about David Gerrold's plans any more than I care about Ellison's plans for "City on the Edge of Forever". I'm just glad that neither came to pass.
And again- that's 3rd season.
That wasn't anti-war, it was anti-*clean* war, i.e. a fake war that killed people but left the culture and infrastructure intact allowing it to go on forever. Kirk and crew were more than welling not just to rage *real* war to stop it, but to destroy their entire planet while doing so.
The meaning was simple- if you go to war, destroy your enemy completely and rapidly- don't just target part of them. In plain historical terms, WWII, not Vietnam although one would have to remember that all the lessons of the latter wouldn't be clear for half a decade yet.
I covered that in post above. Please read it.
That was a lesson about Eugenics and once again "power corrupting". Not just feeling superior, although I don't mind that message as such, it's TNG should have heared.
It's one worth hearing again, as western culture is once again considering a type of eugenics.
Hell, the mere act of putting a female (!) black (!!) commissioned naval officer (!!!) on the bridge (!!!!) was a radical left-wing act back then, despite the fact that (as George Takei later put it) she mostly just "answered the phones." And there were TV stations throughout the South that refused to air the episode where aliens make Uhura and Kirk kiss (this after Nichols and Shatner deliberately flubbed every take that tried to hide it).
And if Roddenberry had had his way, they would've had a female first officer who was every bit a badass as her CO (the network killed that one).
(In comparison, off forum I'm friends with a self-described Marxist who considers DSC regressive in comparison to earlier Star Trek shows, with some reason.)
You need to study Southern history better. Seriously. (And for the record, I've lived in North Carolina since I was 11.)
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
That article actually does pretty good job of detailing most of my own issues with Discovery.
Thinking about it now, I actually shouldn't worry as much, since I don't really think Cryptic's writers are capable of the same level of "grimdark" as Discovery's showrunners. They kind of tried during the Iconian war, but it's a little hard to capture that same feeling in a video game; especially an MMO. More than likely, we'll be getting more of the same dorky space adventures (with lots of shooting) that we normally get, with a matching, Saturday morning cartoon-level antagonist. Standard Cryptic fare.
Again, I just want to eventually see the story move past the recent ending of the Hurq arc. I was kind of hoping we'd eventually make it to Andromeda, since we've already kind of explored most of the more interesting parts of our own galaxy.
Agreed. They gorge out new content faster than some people can keep up with, and is always accompanied by a legion of new bugs and imbalances, of which only one third gets fixed (if we're lucky).
My character Tsin'xing
The article was very TNG focused and basically ignored all the other shows (especially DS9 and Enterprise). Each show has been in different in very significant ways from the others with only a thin overlay to give the illusion they exist in the same time line. Even a passing examination would reveal that couldn't possibility be the case as the inconsistencies are just too great in number and seriousness.
I'm not paying to watch TRIBBLE, so I can't comment on its story beyond what I've seen in Youtube videos and various articles I've read. It looks very bad to my eye, but not for the reasons given in that article. Still, with what little I do know it's not the bottom of the heap for me. That honor belongs to TNG. If I ever do watch it for free, I may change my mind.